Do general treatment guidelines for Asian American Families have applications to specific ethnic groups? The case of culturally-competent therapy with Korean Americans
Department of Child Development and Family Studies, Purdue University, USA. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy
(Impact Factor: 1.01).
08/2004; 30(3):359-72. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-0606.2004.tb01246.x
To serve Korean American families effectively, marriage and family therapists need to develop a level of cultural competence. This content analysis of the relevant treatment literature was conducted to discover the most common expert recommendations for family therapy with Asian Americans and to examine their application to Korean Americans. Eleven specific guidelines were generated: Assess support systems, assess immigration history establish professional credibility, provide role induction, facilitate "saving face," accept somatic complaints, be present/problem focused, be directive, respect family structure, be nonconfrontational, and provide positive reframes. Empirical support (clinical and nonclinical research) and conceptual support for each guideline are discussed, and conclusions are reached regarding culturally competent therapy with Korean American families.
Available from: Doris F Chang
- "In a series of quasi-intervention analogue studies, the authors tested specific cultural hypotheses regarding interaction effects of client and therapist ethnicity and cultural value orientation, therapist counseling style, and session goal on ratings of therapy process. These studies report significant main effects of therapist self-disclosure of coping strategies (B. S. K. Kim et al., 2003), use of a directive counseling style (Li & Kim, 2004), and problem-focused interventions (B. S. K. Kim et al., 2002) on measures such as therapist empathy, credibility, and competence. However, the complex ways in which therapist and client variables interact across therapy situations have proven more difficult to tease apart. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: More than three decades ago, articles began appearing that addressed the issue of how to provide effective psychotherapy for Asian Americans (e.g., Sue & Sue, 1972; Yamamoto, 1978). Since that time, articles dealing with that topic that are either clinical, theoretical, or empirical have continued to appear, and scholars have periodically provided state-of-art reviews of that literature. One of those reviews (Leong, 1986) serves as the foundation for this chapter. In an effort to update that critical review, the authors review the literature on psychotherapy process and outcome with Asian Americans published since 1985. This chapter is organized into four main categories: empirical studies, culture-specific treatment models, general treatment strategies and recommendations, and clinical case studies. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Available from: Larry Fiebert
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This Asian Indian and Korean Needs Assessment report attempts to answer the question
What must the social and health services network of agencies, providers, and funders
know and understand about the needs of the Korean and Asian Indian populations in the community, to improve service provision and respond to their health, family, personal and social service needs of these populations? The author was able to identify 14 basic problem areas or unmet need themes faced by
the Korean and Asian Indian populations in the North Penn community.Health Foundation, The report also contains a recommendation section that includes sixty recommendations
for future action, which are selectively directed to the social service and health care community,
funders, educational systems, and to the Korean and Asian Indian communities
Available from: Stephanie Brooks
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: For more than a decade the issue of provider competency has been linked to significant problems in the delivery of health care services. This in turn has increased attention towards evaluating the quality of education and clinical training in health care professional programs. In 2004, the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy established core competencies (MFT CC) for the profession. Adopting clinical competency will require couple and family therapy (CFT) professional education programs, at a minimum to develop outcome-based educational approaches and become more adept at measuring CFT student’s clinical competency and development over time. It further suggests CFT educators need to have competencies to develop and implement an outcome based curriculum. Yet, little is known about CFT faculty aptitude in this area. The primary aim of this study was to identify and describe CFT faculty’ attitude, concerns, experiences, and perceptions about competency and outcome based education. Results of the study provide valuable information about how faculty are managing five years after the introduction of the MFT CC and the new COAMFTE standards. The CFT faculty clearly value both the MFT CC and OBE . The MFT CC are used to influence program curriculum and CFT faculty believe they will improve the clinical evaluation of students. The CFT faculty desire to be involved in the ongoing development of the MFT CC and want the AAMFT to offer more training. Furthermore, CFT faculty are seriously adopting an OBE paradigm despite reporting they received less than 5 hours of training in the approach. While CFT faculty found their institutions supportive of the OBE approach, the findings suggest they are overextended and stressed. The implications of the findings are discussed for both faculty and program development. Future directions for research are proposed including examining the similarities and differences between CFT faculty in doctoral and post-degree institute programs to better appreciate how the faculty from the COAMFTE accredited have responded to this paradigmatic shift.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.